ZAGREB, July 16 (Hina) - This week's decision of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in the Tadic case, which defines the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina as an international
conflict, shows that the number of judges accepting this view is increasing. "The decision of the Appeals Chamber points to the trend of defining the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina as an international one", said Anto Nobilo, defence attorney for Tihomir Blaskic. Following the judgements in two major cases - "Celebici" (in which the conflict was defined as an international one) and "Tadic" (in which it was defined as an internal conflict), the latest Appeals Chamber decision tips the scale in favour of the Bosnian conflict being an international one because, although it is not binding, the trial chambers will probably have it in mind whe
ZAGREB, July 16 (Hina) - This week's decision of the Appeals Chamber
of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(ICTY) in the Tadic case, which defines the conflict in Bosnia-
Herzegovina as an international conflict, shows that the number of
judges accepting this view is increasing.
"The decision of the Appeals Chamber points to the trend of defining
the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina as an international one", said
Anto Nobilo, defence attorney for Tihomir Blaskic.
Following the judgements in two major cases - "Celebici" (in which
the conflict was defined as an international one) and "Tadic" (in
which it was defined as an internal conflict), the latest Appeals
Chamber decision tips the scale in favour of the Bosnian conflict
being an international one because, although it is not binding, the
trial chambers will probably have it in mind when adopting future
decisions.
The international character of the Bosnian conflict is important
for Hague indictees because it is still believed that the
Prosecution, in proving violations of the Geneva Conventions,
should first prove that those violations were committed in an
international conflict.
There are, however, some departures from this rule as well. In the
Aleksovski case, the Appeals Chamber dismissed charges regarding
the violation of the Geneva Conventions with two votes for and one
against, because it believed that the international character of
the conflict had not been proved. One judge, however, assessed that
the character of the conflict is irrelevant. Judge Almiro Rodrigues
became the first judge to accept the new argument of the
Prosecution, offered in the Prosecutor's closing statement at the
trial of the former head of the Kaonik prison, Zlatko Aleksovski,
saying the character of the conflict was irrelevant for the
violation of the Geneva Conventions.
The judgement of the Appeals Chamber in the "Tadic" case is
currently most important for Tadic himself, because it reinstates
some counts of his indictment which had been dropped earlier, which
means additional years in prison for the former member of reserve
police forces who killed and tortured Muslims and Croats in the
Prijedor area in 1992.
As regards other Hague indictees charged with violating the Geneva
Conventions, the importance of the latest decision will depend on
the readiness of other judges to accept the 'trend' of defining the
Bosnian conflict as an international one. Given that judges of the
Appeals Chamber sit on other trial chambers, this decision could
indicate judgements in proceedings against other indictees charged
with violations of the Geneva Conventions.
In case of Tihomir Blaskic, a former commander of the Central Bosnia
operative zone, charged, among other things, with violations of the
Geneva Conventions, the views of two out of three members of the
trial chamber are known. Judge Rodrigues presented his stand in the
Aleksovski case, whereas a member of the Appeals Chamber Mohamad
Shahabuddeen in the Tadic case believed the conflict in Bosnia was
an international conflict.
(hina) rml